Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2312.05696 v1 pith:3L7D5RGM submitted 2023-12-09 cs.SE cs.AI

GPT-4 and Safety Case Generation: An Exploratory Analysis

classification cs.SE cs.AI
keywords safetycasesgpt-4experimentssystemcapacitygeneratingnotation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In the ever-evolving landscape of software engineering, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) and conversational interfaces, exemplified by ChatGPT, is nothing short of revolutionary. While their potential is undeniable across various domains, this paper sets out on a captivating expedition to investigate their uncharted territory, the exploration of generating safety cases. In this paper, our primary objective is to delve into the existing knowledge base of GPT-4, focusing specifically on its understanding of the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN), a well-established notation allowing to visually represent safety cases. Subsequently, we perform four distinct experiments with GPT-4. These experiments are designed to assess its capacity for generating safety cases within a defined system and application domain. To measure the performance of GPT-4 in this context, we compare the results it generates with ground-truth safety cases created for an X-ray system system and a Machine-Learning (ML)-enabled component for tire noise recognition (TNR) in a vehicle. This allowed us to gain valuable insights into the model's generative capabilities. Our findings indicate that GPT-4 demonstrates the capacity to produce safety arguments that are moderately accurate and reasonable. Furthermore, it exhibits the capability to generate safety cases that closely align with the semantic content of the reference safety cases used as ground-truths in our experiments.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Evaluating Assurance Cases as Text-Attributed Graphs for Structure and Provenance Analysis

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Graph neural networks on assurance case graphs reach 0.76 ROC-AUC for link prediction and 0.94 F1 for distinguishing human from LLM-generated cases, with observed differences in hierarchical linking patterns.

  2. Automating Quality Assessment with NLP of LLM-Generated Defeaters

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    BERT embeddings and meta-classifiers trained on 172 expert-annotated defeaters from two assurance cases achieve F1≈0.84 in predicting quality ratings, outperforming the low inter-rater agreement (κ<0.442) between huma...